: > [{quoted}](name=NikaraFC,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=V85rvAVm,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-01-08T23:48:09.157+0000) > > This is a myth, its a nice game of word semantics but your quote "For you to get punished, you have to have had a history of insulting and harassing others" is blatantly misleading, it isnt what RIOT considers offensive its what any troll wants to be considered offensive and the other two he plays with or the other 2 normally in a game. example would be 2 people intentionally come in try and ruin the game , pick a way and you ask them to stop. both will report you = one report do that in every game you are banned. The reform card is an even bigger myth have yet to see. Why would they create a system where 2 people can report an innocent person and the innocent gets punished? Do you think they just WANT to lose their playerbase? That would be the dumbest fucking system ever. I dont know why you would ever assume thats how it works. Its as if you just made up the most absurd system you could think of, and then told us thats how it works. Come on, man. Thats just plain stupid.
> Why would they create a system where 2 people can report an innocent person and the innocent gets punished? Do you think they just WANT to lose their playerbase? That would be the dumbest fucking system ever. I dont know why you would ever assume thats how it works. Its as if you just made up the most absurd system you could think of, and then told us thats how it works. Come on, man. Thats just plain stupid. In a decent amount of circumstances, that is how it has worked. I've seen people say "how did that kill me" as the only thing in all chats (pre-game, in game, post game) and still receive chat restriction for their "toxic/offensive chat". I've seen a solid number of other Board submissions of people getting punished for "intentionally feeding" despite their scores being fine for the results of the matches. In fact, there are players in a lot of those matches clearly performing worse than the penalized player. No one "made up" a system, it's simply the results of the current system in place. Which is why the Player Behavior systems need to be refined altogether.
: > [{quoted}](name=Psyclone13,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=V85rvAVm,comment-id=00000002,timestamp=2019-01-09T04:49:04.251+0000) > > If this was true I wouldn't have been punished period. I said the R-word once in the game -- it's obvious what IFS picked up. I corrected myself by not "going off" further on the player, I simply muted and continued playing. The entire remainder of the chat log (which I posted in a new reply as well as edited into the original post) was spent talking to one of the 2 non-premade teammates -- the other was the muted griefer -- and the enemy team in /all chat. Discussing another player's griefing with the other players isn't toxic/negative. It's discussion. And outside of all that I was still playing the game through and through, not only trying to win the game but also helping others when able. > > You're not wrong about this last paragraph in a sense. However, I simply make a suggestion based on those situations and continue to play the match. To me, especially in normals, them choosing to not listen and continue not having a fun/enjoyable match is on them. I don't further engage in any manor, let alone an aggressive one. Holy shit i actually believed you for a second... but you really edited and misquoted him to make him look wrong. Wow. Thats some serious dirty politician style shit. You should honestly be ashamed of that. Fucking hate that misleading tactic of purposely misquoting someone and distorting their words. no fucking integrity whatsoever.
You didn't even quote the correct text to what you're referring to. _**READ**_ what's being said before throwing your nonsense into the fray. And to reiterate once again, I never edited or misquoted anything. If you actually had read the whole conversation, it's clearly in context and emphasizes the point I was making in my reply. I showed the contrast to what he said in the first line to what he exclaimed in the second quote. Whether I cut the first part off or not has no relation to what the focus is on, which are on ZT-words.
Wuks (NA)
: If possible, please reach out to the Moderation team at your earliest convenience, or shoot me an email at wuks@boards.lol. Thanks!
If you were referring to me, I just sent an e-mail!
shipo13 (EUNE)
: "playing the entire match not only to win, but to also have fun and help other teammates" Game1: https://prnt.sc/m4q7bx Psyclone13: **h**ill **y**our**s**elf Psyclone13: trust me
Not only did you cut the next line out from what was said the pre-game lobby chat to attempt to change the context of my sentences, you also fail to actually consider that there's a reason I said the first line in the first place. It's a joke between myself and one of my premades, who were the only one's chatting in the pre-game lobby, and there was no aggressive intent in the joke as well. Whether you believe that or not is on you though, since PB cuts out all context by removing all but your own chat. Furthermore, it still doesn't touch upon what the Post is about.
Kei143 (NA)
: Hmm.. you might be aware that calling someone a dumb ape isn't acceptable, but are you also aware that the way you ask for reports, call someone a kid, accuse them of inting are also considered as harassment? If you didn't think those were counted as harassment, then it would make sense why you say you didn't think you had any past actions that were deemed toxic. Btw, positive behavior is accounted for within the behavioral system. The behavioral system is like a music game with a toxicity meter. Small traces of toxicity slowly increase your toxicity meter and clean positive games decrease your toxicity meter. If you exceed the toxicity meter limit, you will get punished.
To hit each point: * The "dumb ape" thing wasn't even included in the Ticket Response. Clearly it's not the best thing to say but the bot apparently isn't even going off that. * How is calling for a report on AFK players harassment if they're not even there? I'm not repeatedly asking or pressuring anyone into doing so, nor am I ruining the experience of any of the players I'm asking when I'm still playing the game and helping others. * The kid "insult" shouldn't even be detected considering its a pretty normal & common word outside of that light, and furthermore was part of the "heated statement" I mentioned in my post when I obviously said a clear [IFS trigger word]. * Saying a player is "inting", sometimes even towards myself, is moreso just an expression of running it down unnecessarily by one's self, rather than the actual definition of intentionally feeding to ruin a game. In the context of the conversation, even without the griefer's initial comments, I figure it was pretty obvious which I was talking about when I say things like > Psyclone13: so he gfoes solo Psyclone13: she gets all the kills then runs solo to die in iso Psyclone13: then flames a random teammate for it Explaining the situation at hand to a teammate isn't toxicity, it's explaining the situation, no?
rujitra (NA)
: You completely reversed the meaning of that sentence, then immediately quoted the correct sentence. You did this in an attempt to make it look like I was contradicting myself. The system is not flawed. Your attitude here shows me even more so that this punishment was more than accurate. Again be lucky your punishment wasn't worse. You've shot yourself in the foot here after you got caught playing with quotes to make me look bad and you respond by saying it's "no big deal". Your behavior was wrong. You not accepting that doesn't change the fact it was wrong. I am done responding here as it is clear you have no desire to see any response other than "omg ur so right ur punishment invalid omg Riot suk". I hope you can improve your behavior prior to you receiving a permanent ban.
You literally had already contradicted yourself by trying to claim what the facts were and I quoted it in context. You added the confusion that I'm sure others are already thinking when they see the situation. I'm not manipulating anything when I'm literally just laying out what you said regarding the situation. Unlike you, I can accept when I've made a mistake. I've already expressed that several times, yet that's the only thing you can focus on when all you can think is: > you have no desire to see any response other than "omg ur so right ur punishment invalid omg Riot suk". If ignorance is what you want to stick by, be my guest.
: AFKing is handled by the Leaverbuster, which is a separate system that doesn't actually ban people. The IFS doesn't care if someone is AFK, it only looks at chat/inting.
A ban isn't always the necessary punishment obviously, but a punishment should still be yielded either way when its clearly done in a manner to hurt [a] players' experience. And nevertheless, Leaverbuster is a system with its own abusable flaws as well. In my post, I can edit where IFS can be replaced by the Player Behavior systems as a whole, which is where my post's title was aiming for. My point still stands where these systems are abused without fear of repercussion, and need work.
rujitra (NA)
: You cut that first quote out of context. The sentence reads that a punishment **other than zero tolerance** is never based on one line. Zero tolerance is by definition based on only one line (or possibly more, but the minimum is one). I really think you should stop now while you're ahead. You should've got a 14 day ban but for some reason the system didn't give you one. Rioters do patrol these boards and there are cases in history where they increased punishments when it was obvious that the player was not understanding. Your attempts to take quotes out of context and trying to game your way into justifying your behavior show that your punishment was not severe enough to make you understand your behavior is incorrect. The next punishment will be a 25 game chat restriction, followed by a 14 day ban, then a permanent ban. I hope you can realize your behavior is inappropriate before you reach the permanent ban.
Me cutting off the part where you are referring to non-ZT isn't cutting anything out of context. *You* said i used a ZT word which is clearly why I was hit for "solely one line in the chat". Me adding the normal punishment part isn't relevant when that's not the focus. Never was I trying to game my way into justifying my behavior. I'm here showing all my cards and I'm not here to get a change in my punishment. I'm fully aware of why I was punished and made that clear in my post by expressing such. Instead of trying to Big Brother yourself over the people who post on these threads, you could actually read why I made this post in the first place. I'm here to show why the system is evidently flawed to punish those who aren't actually bringing toxicity to the game, those who have the discipline to correct their behavior before a punishment is even yielded. Meanwhile the players actually griefing, harassing, and/or berating others continue to do it game after game without the bat of an eye.
rujitra (NA)
: The "r word" is considered zero tolerance. It shouldn't take a warning for you to know that isn't okay. The fact you thought it was okay to use that sort of derogatory and hateful language is the reason for an instant punishment on your account. And yes, harassing another player by saying they're "griefing" repeatedly **is** toxic. Game chat is designed to be used for strategizing, not blaming or flaming or harassment.
And furthermore, just because you see the "r word" as the way you see it, doesn't mean that applies to everyone else. At the end of the day, to me, it's a word with a specific meaning/definition and has no association with the actual mentally/physically challenged and impaired. I use the word in the context of that definition -- It's only derogatory when you associate it as such. So spare me the wrist slap when it's not what this post is for.
rujitra (NA)
: The "r word" is considered zero tolerance. It shouldn't take a warning for you to know that isn't okay. The fact you thought it was okay to use that sort of derogatory and hateful language is the reason for an instant punishment on your account. And yes, harassing another player by saying they're "griefing" repeatedly **is** toxic. Game chat is designed to be used for strategizing, not blaming or flaming or harassment.
> “zero tolerance” (which gets a 14 day ban off the bat) is never based on solely one line within chat ~ > The "r word" is considered zero tolerance. Yet I only received a 10 game chat restriction. You're saying Riot is fine with that word? Spare me the trouble of telling me what you think Riot has in place when you aren't the IFS developers/coders. I understand you're a Specialist but don't throw down claims that aren't accurate. Just adds confusion to everyone's situations. > And yes, harassing another player by saying they're "griefing" repeatedly is toxic. Game chat is designed to be used for strategizing, not blaming or flaming or harassment. I never said the word "griefing" in the chat. Me telling other players to not engage with the griefer's toxic behavior and rather to just play the game isn't toxic in the slightest. if letting other players get harassed and triggered as the "positive" thing to do is the standard you want to hold, then there's an issue. I was strategizing the entire game and I'm still punished for one line that I already had corrected myself on by not further engaging with the player's garbage behavior, which is most likely why the player proceeded to intentionally AFK since they couldn't gain any further entertainment from simply harassing teammates.
: The problem is no automated system will ever be able to punish non-chat related offenses without the use of context, and even then it has no way of determining intent. As long as you aren't inting/trolling in an extremely obvious way, the system will never catch you because maybe its "just a bad game".
If the bot can't simply detect a player afk'ing for 20 minutes of the game by sitting in base and going to both major buffs then back to the fountain to afk, there's a problem. Intentional feeding is obviously a case-by-case thing, and definitely requires full context on all fronts to determine (gameplay, chat, pings, player tendencies, etc.). But being AFK for an extended period of time whilst also harassing teammates and literally expressing that they're going afk should be pretty cut and dry.
rujitra (NA)
: I am not sure how many times people have to say this: **There are no “trigger words” for *most* punishments**. Period. You do not get punished because you “said a ‘bad’ word”. You get punished for your attitude and demeanor in chat **as a whole**. A *normal* punishment, i.e. one that is not for something “zero tolerance” (which gets a 14 day ban off the bat) is **never** based on solely one line within chat. It is based on your attitude and demeanor throughout the game. While you may have only *directly* attacked someone once, continual negativity including giving up, being defeatist, making fun of your teammates deaths or score, and other things like that. You are correct that things like “game state” and past “positive contributions” do not excuse negative behavior. It does not matter if you are winning, losing, getting destroyed, or if you think is “intentionally feeding” or bringing the team down. It does not matter if you think you’re playing better than everyone else and you think you have the “right answer” and the team “just needs to listen”. You are not the boss of others, and you do not get to be defeatist or negative just because you feel like it. You claim that you are one of these “positive players” - but you’re not. You were punished as a hint that, hey, your behavior is falling below the standard accepted by the League system. You were not punished by any “griefer” or “troll” - you were punished because of **your** behavior (and your lack of self control to not use chat inappropriately). I understand it’s frustrating to hear that you are being problematic in League - but blaming it on what is, in reality, a **very** small number of “griefers” or “trolls” does not make it okay - even if it **were** true. The problem is that many of the things that “trigger” toxicity from players like you is that **those things aren’t punishable**. There’s a lot of people who get mad when they have someone running it down or blatantly trolling - heck, me included. Never received a punishment, though, because *if* I get mad and go off in chat it’s only in that *one* game where the troll is - and they’re so rare that if you went off in every game with a legitimate troll in it, it’s likely you’d never meet the limit for punishment (which is much more than one game in almost all cases, even if only one game is shown in your chat card). However, you likely don’t just “go off” in games with *actual* trolls/griefers. You go off on teammates who don’t listen to you, because they’re “trolling” unless they do. You go off on teammates because they lost lane and keep trying to fight - even though that’s their prerogative and they don’t have to listen to you. There’s so many more options, but I **guarantee** you that you don’t just get “triggered” by trolls/griefers.
> You get punished for your attitude and demeanor in chat **as a whole** If this was true I wouldn't have been punished period. I said the R-word once in the game -- it's obvious what IFS picked up. I corrected myself by not "going off" further on the player, I simply muted and continued playing. The entire remainder of the chat log (which I posted in a new reply as well as edited into the original post) was spent talking to one of the 2 non-premade teammates -- the other was the muted griefer -- and the enemy team in /all chat. Discussing another player's griefing with the other players isn't toxic/negative. It's discussion. And outside of all that I was still playing the game through and through, not only trying to win the game but also helping others when able. > There’s so many more options, but I guarantee you that you don’t just get “triggered” by trolls/griefers. You're not wrong about this last paragraph in a sense. However, I simply make a suggestion based on those situations and continue to play the match. To me, especially in normals, them choosing to not listen and continue not having a fun/enjoyable match is on them. I don't further engage in any manor, let alone an aggressive one.
Kei143 (NA)
: Do you know that the IFS (excluding the Zero tolerance phrases) punishes people based on consistency x severity? For you to get punished, you have to have had a history of insulting and harassing others. So maybe what you claimed as educating other players is really not so much educating other players, but you might be harassing them instead. If you want to know what exactly you got you punished you could post your chat logs and we could help you dissect what went wrong.
Just put my chat logs as a new comment. I'm aware of the line that I was punished for, which isn't nearly as bad as a lot of the things I've seen put into chat that go unpunished on an equal or more severe scale (insta 2-week suspension type garbage). I've been punished before -- granted it was around 2 years ago -- and since then, haven't had any *clear* punishments made against me/my account to give history/consistency. I've heard there's a sort of subsystem for Honor that tracks non-punishable negative behavior, which seems completely skewed in my opinion even more so than IFS considering that's even more false-positives being detected by the system. But to keep on point... I could have easily spent the whole game flaming the griefer after [s]he repeatedly harassed & griefed the team. Instead, I refocused on the game and I'm still punished despite trying to communicate and work with my team, and being positive for a vast majority of the game. I was in a group of 3 and unfortunately 1 of the 2 people whom afk'd in the match was part of my group, I reported them equally as I did the griefer who also intentionally afk'd whilst refusing to cooperate with the team and flaming everyone else. My jungler, who was a nonpremade, struggled for most of the game because he wasn't used to jungle nor the champ he was playing. I gave him advice constantly throughout the match to help him find success, regardless of the match being 3v5. As I mentioned in the original post, the chat restriction/personally being punished isn't my issue. The fact that positive behavior doesn't hold any weight whatsoever is a very big issue, and currently is the other half of the coin on how toxicity is currently handled by a player standpoint. Looking outside of the non-competitive queues, most Ranked games are spent almost entirely in utter silence, excluding call specific communication and an occasional reaction to something funny that happens. More often than not, people are extremely limited in who they honor, not only from the limitation of only being able to honor 1 person per game (despite League being the most Team-centric it's ever been), but also from the fact that usually "positive behavior" in Ranked is simply whoever carried the hardest or held their weight the most in the honorer's eye. Nothing is really ever said or expressed to merit actual positive behavior. Mind you, looking from Riot's standpoint, no behavior is better than poor behavior, but realistically nothing positive occurs outside from just playing the game. Simply put, they can't track consistency if they're only nitpicking the seemingly bad behavior.
: Its a completely automated system that doesn't use any context. No amount of "work" is ever going to fix the problems that come with that outside of Riot having people manually reviewing games.
> Its a completely automated system that doesn't use any context. No amount of "work" is ever going to fix the problems that come with that outside of Riot having people manually reviewing games. That as a supplement in some way shape or form in addition to the current IFS can make strides towards a better system. Also, just simply having better detection schemes for other tendencies outside of just "negative chat behavior" will actually solve a large chunk of League's toxicity where its rooted. This is a discussion thread for a reason, I'm open to any ideas that might become a feasible solution.
Rioter Comments
: This is fuckin bullshit. I get a 14 day ban for one unfortunate game where I said a few words and actual inters get away? And now you ban OP for dying a couple times? Does Riot not know what inting looks like? https://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/2897285381/228591326?tab=overview HERE RIOT....AN ACTUAL FUCKIN INTER. HE THREW A WON GAME JUST BECAUSE OUR JUNGLER WAS BETTER THAN HIM AND HE COULDN'T BE THE HERO THAT HARD CARRIED. WHY THE FUCK ISN'T HE BANNED? I FUCKIN REPORTED THAT GARBAGE MONTHS AGO AND NOT A FUCKIN THING WAS EVER DONE. WHY THE FUCK IS RIOT ALWAYS BANNING THE WRONG FUCKIN PEOPLE!!
Are you sure he hasn't been punished? He hasn't played any games since late November from the looks of it. ... Granted, if the system actually worked, he should have been punished well before then...
: Jailbait is a term for teens who look like adults not children who look like teens. Got to be real stupid to believe zoe is 17. I refer back to my previous statement.
you're the only one here assuming she's a child. plenty of people over 18 with underdeveloped bodies. plenty of people under 18 with overdeveloped bodies. if you can't handle that, go continue watching your Jake Paul and Ricegum videos. Lux is at least 23 based on the lore btw.
: How about you stop watching anime if you seriously believe little children have the same body types as teenage/young adults.
your ignorance once again shines with your reply completely ignoring what was said. Everyone develops differently regardless of age compared to someone else the same age. hence why you see a lot of different extremes in both age groups. why do you think "jailbait" is a common term in our society? you must be extremely sheltered if you haven't met, or even seen a girl who is extremely overdeveloped "for her age" whilst being under 18, or even under 16. same goes for flat chested women over 18 -- a body type like Chloe Moretz -- who even get made fun of for not being as developed as other women around their age, body types identical to pretty much any model out there... and even they have different ranges. different body types exist, deal with it. and no one's referring to anime kid. maybe you should try getting outside once in a while and meet actual people rather than watching a screen all day.
Raoul (EUW)
: That was something RIOT came up with because roughly 0.000001 seconds after zoes reveal, there was already porn with her.
doesn't stop the annie hentai though {{sticker:zombie-nunu-bummed}}
: I like how OP just declares Lux being the same age as Zoe and people just upvoted it when they clearly have different body types.
not every person of the same age has the same body type as one another. everyone develops differently. your statement is pretty ignorant.
: The Jinx W buff hasn't quite hit the mark yet (with the numbers), but I think its a good buff overall for her. The Katarina updates are slightly excessive. 15 second CD on her ultimate makes denying her resets useless -- in all honestly Katarina's in a good position right now, she can abuse weaker team compositions and still have a place in most comps. Lux's changes are extremely unnecessary though. If you want to make her more "mastery based" you guys should make it so her W applies her passive's mark to enemies that it hits, so when comboing you have to get an AA in as it goes out and after it comes back in. Her ultimate is already on an extremely low CD for the amount of damage that it does. Giving it a CD reset pretty much makes her a safer version of Katarina at the end of the day.
Also I've seen this tons of times and said it myself, change Lux's E to reward leaving it out for a longer duration for increased damage rather than having it just be an instant pop for full damage (start through 33% cast duration does less damage than live, 33-66% duration does equal to live, 66-full duration does bonus damage)
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: March 23
The Jinx W buff hasn't quite hit the mark yet (with the numbers), but I think its a good buff overall for her. The Katarina updates are slightly excessive. 15 second CD on her ultimate makes denying her resets useless -- in all honestly Katarina's in a good position right now, she can abuse weaker team compositions and still have a place in most comps. Lux's changes are extremely unnecessary though. If you want to make her more "mastery based" you guys should make it so her W applies her passive's mark to enemies that it hits, so when comboing you have to get an AA in as it goes out and after it comes back in. Her ultimate is already on an extremely low CD for the amount of damage that it does. Giving it a CD reset pretty much makes her a safer version of Katarina at the end of the day.
Keyru (NA)
: [Resolved] 4/28 Server Issues - Ranked Disabled/Reconnect Spikes
Did Taliyah earthbend the Riot engineers for her first order of business??? Y'all need to get these champions under control {{sticker:zombie-nunu-bummed}}
: Patch 5.24 notes
> NEW Assassin LONE WOLF You deal 1.5% increased damage when no allied champions are near you So wait... where in the hell is this mastery going in the Cunning tree? I figured it'd be something to replace the Bounty Hunter mastery in the Ferocity tree or something

Psyclone13

Level 150 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion